Abstract: The author examines the reformation of the voivode-mandatory administration of Siberia and focuses his attention on the combination of the defining factors, first and foremost the colonizational character   of the territory, traditionally more expanded competency of the local government officials, conduction of the diplomatic relations with the bordering states, absence of noble landownership, developed self-governance among the migrants, etc. Namely the peculiarities of the region created such regional institutions and centers of power that could put the local society and administration above the supreme authority. The author underlines that the reforms of the early XVIII century in Siberia were conducted considering the specificity of the region, and that resulted in the deviation from the unified governorate administration in the empire.  An example of such deviation from the rational principles of the empire-building became the restoration in the late 1720’s of the Siberian order, but this measure did not pan out, because besides the order, the All-Siberian affairs were under the competency of the Senate, collegiums, Siberian governor, and the specialized financial and departmental metallurgical administration. With regards to Siberia, during the period of 1710-1782, there were “Special orders” for the governors, developed by taking into account the geographical, economic, and socio-political specificity of the region.  

Abstract: The article includes analysis of the legislative bases, directions and contents of development of administrative institution of governors in the Caucasian territories of the Russian Empire in the middle of XIX to early XX centuries.  The Imperial legislation of 1856-1859 pursued a goal of creating a local system, which would be similar to the existing ministry system in the central apparatus, while taking into account the local ethnic and religious specificities of the region.  The Chambers were transformed into the Departments, and they were given powers of the Ministries, while the legislative branch was concentrated in temporary division under the auspices of the chief department of the Governor of Caucasus.  The author singles out territorial, regional, social, political, normative and legal factors in the processes. Attention is paid to the legislative regulation of specific features of the official position of the Imperial Governor in this territory of the Empire. The author makes a conclusion on the fact that the state administration practice of Russia in the Imperial period took into account to the territorial and legislative status of a region prior to its inclusion into the Empire.  At the same time, the supreme power of the governor in the Caucasian territories was supported, and he was the head of the administrative hierarchy of the Caucasus, while the contradictory character of this form of territorial administration is noted.

Abstract: The article includes analysis of stages, vectors and contents of the development of the Empire administrative institution in the period since XVIII till early XIX century. The author singles out the tendencies: unification, centralization, bureaucratization, autonomous functioning in some regions within territorial and branch-related implementation levels.  The author then makes a conclusion on practical consideration of existing territorial and legislative statuses of the regions prior to their annexing to the Russian Empire. And it is only in the epoch of Catherine the II that the traditional measures - centralization and central concentration of government - are eased, however, the direction towards support of absolutist state remains. The author evaluates Ministry Departments, which became independent central government bodies in early XIX century as being overly centralized and making government overly official and bureaucratic.  As a result, the lack of clarity in competence of government institutions, as well as the right of Governors General and Governors to address the Monarch directly, lead to misalignment in the functioning of the state mechanism.